World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Hate speech will always exist. The defeat of the Nazis in WW2 didn’t end antisemitism. It didn’t even end fuckin nazism. The civil war didn’t end confederate sympathies. The fall of the USSR didn’t defeat Stalinism. The war on terror didn’t end terrorism. The war on drugs didn’t end drugs.
So to say, “I support apartheid because hate speech exists” is…genuinely insane. Wars on ideas and behaviors NEVER end the idea or the behavior. And to somehow believe that they CAN, somehow, maayybe this time! work is nothing more than either lying for ulterior motives, or you’re somehow convincing yourself.
Did the war in Afghanistan and the way in Iraq make sense because of 9/11? OF COURSE NOT. There were ulterior motives for those invasions. There are ulterior motives for this extermination. And they’re actually being perpetrated by mostly the same goddamn entities.
Let me just ask, do you now say that you support the “war on terror” and “operation Iraqi Freedom” because 9/11? If you don’t buy into that rationale, then you will have to explain to me how you could possibly be buying into this one.
—also, if I didn’t make myself clear: the bush wars bred ISIS and only served to boost Al qaeda strength/positioning. And the extermination of the Palestinian people is causing a massive surge in antisemitism. Again, as I stated in every single one of my precious comments: THIS IS WRONG, ANTISEMITISM IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO THIS CONFLICT. But it is very much a response. Terrorism is ALSO wrong, but the war on terror served as the greatest recruitment tool fundamentalist extremist groups ever had. So if your ultimate concern is ending antisemitic hate speech, you’re very much on the wrong side of this issue.
I think you missed the point - there can be no long term peace when either side views the other with a level of hatred that they justify killing innocent civilians and cheer that on.
This is happening on both sides, but this specific incident is a Palestinian woman who has been fed hate speech her entire life, while others around her learned it in UNRWA funded schools and turned around to murder civilians in terror attacks.
Okay…but you could literally characterize either side of this conflict that way. From a Palestinian perspective, the IDF soldiers committing war crimes by intentionally bombing schools, hospitals, and decimating entire bloodlines are perpetrating “terror attacks.” But one is state-sponsored and systematic, being perpetrated by a MUCH stronger force against an occupied peoples, while the other is a violent fundamentalist group that is funded by THE OTHER side of the normal geopolitical lines.
I don’t support Hamas. In fact, I think they’re downright despicable. But that sentiment doesn’t justify Israeli aggression.
As I said, you invoked Oct. 7 and hate speech as your reason for backing the occupation. Did anti-American sentiment and the 9/11 attacks justify the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq? Your rationale is exactly the justification for that war.
I invoked October 7th as the rationale for the war. Not the occupation. Don't twist words. It's unbecoming.
I remember 9/11 quite well. Bin Laden took too long to hunt down, in no small part because of the Iraqi distraction. Afghanistan needed to happen though. It's never been a stable country (Dr Watson's character has been an Afghanistan vet for how many centuries?), but at the time the Taliban were basically a breeding ground for terrorism, just like Gaza is today.
The propaganda on both sides is pretty heavy which is why you need to read into things - like the US running drone flights over Gaza. My assumption is they're using it to corroborate intelligence passed to them by Israel. For example, evidence that Hamas are using hospitals as military barracks, or rocket launchers in youth centers. Even if it isn't made public, the implication from the US not lifting a finger to stop them is that most of what they are saying is true enough that the US is willing to allow it.
But if your personal philosophy is that the US wants Gaza to burn then I don't think we have any common ground for discussion.
But you know that a huge part of Afghanistan’s instability is due…to foreign meddling…right?
But you missed my entire point. Those invasions BRED MORE TERRORISM. It’s been proven, over and over and over and over again that WARS AND INVASIONS against things like “terrorism,” “drugs,” “communist sympathies,” “ideals that don’t work for my foreign policy,” et al. only breed MORE of the thing you’re fighting. You’re giving it a CLEAR enemy, and are literally and figuratively lighting a fire under their asses to grow in strength, fight, and you’re giving them a very loud and clear recruitment strategy.
You know how you’re seeing A LOT of sudden antisemitism? And a lot of islamophobic thinking/acts? And fuckin PRO-HAMAS SYMPATHIES? I know you know, because you brought it up. It’s what’s started this conversation. Well, that is happening BECAUSE of the war you are supporting. You claim to be against this, when your behavior is doing nothing but supporting it’s growth.
THAT is my point.
…I mean, that’s my point, at this point, because you’ve shifted this conversation away from the things I was initially making points about. Like, you’re taking a pro-Israel stance. And I’m just taking a “but look past your preconceived biases” stance. Hink about what your position actually is. You don’t have to be anti-Israel. I’m literally just telling you that if you actually want what you claim to want, you’re essentially acting against your own interests.